Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 208, § 30

Minor children; removal from commonwealth; prohibition

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 30. A minor child of divorced parents who is a native of or has resided five years within this commonwealth and over whose custody and maintenance a probate court has jurisdiction shall not, if of suitable age to signify his consent, be removed out of this commonwealth without such consent, or, if under that age, without the consent of both parents, unless the court upon cause shown otherwise orders. The court, upon application of any person in behalf of such child, may require security and issue writs and processes to effect the purposes of this and the two preceding sections.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 50 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1930–2026 · leading case: Schechter v. Schechter

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Schechter v. Schechter (2015) massappct · cites it 7× “Second, we review the judgment’s removal provision (see G. L. c. 208, § 30), which provides that the mother has the right to remove the child “from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to the state of New York or *241 another state if the opportunity for employment and security is…”

Mason v. Coleman (2006) mass · cites it 4× “We conclude that in such a situation “cause shown” pursuant to G. L. c. 208, § 30, means a showing that removal is in the “best interests” of the children taking into account all the circumstances and weighing the factors as described below.”

Stout v. Stout (1997) nd · cites it 4× “The statutes of Massachusetts, [Mass.Gen.Laws Ann. ch. 208, § 30 (1994) ]; Minnesota, [Minn.”

Hernandez v. Branciforte (2002) massappct · cites it 7× “There followed a flurry of pretrial motions, which resulted in the appointment of a guardian ad litem for Maximil-lian; an order that the mother either file a petition for his removal to Italy, pursuant to G. L. c. 208, § 30, or be deemed to have waived such a request; an order…”

Blixt v. Blixt (2002) mass · cites it 2× “704, 710-712 (1985) (discussing relevant factors bearing on “best interests” of children that must be considered when evaluating parent’s motion to remove child from Commonwealth pursuant to G. L. c. 208, § 30, despite absence of specifically enumerated standard or factors in…”

Smith v. McDonald (2010) mass · cites it 3× “Relocation of children of divorced parents is governed by G. L. c. 208, § 30, which requires a parent with physical custody to obtain either the consent of the child’s other parent or a court order before moving the child outside the Commonwealth.”

Altomare v. Altomare (2010) massappct · cites it 4× “The judge applied G. L. c. 208, § 30, governing removal from the Commonwealth, and rejected the wife’s petition.”

Murray v. Super (2015) massappct · cites it 3× ““The removal from the Commonwealth of children of divorced parents is governed generally by G. L. c. 208, § 30, as amended through St.”

Williams v. Pitney (1991) mass · cites it 5× “This appeal arises from a Probate Court decision granting authority to the plaintiff (mother) to relocate herself and the two minor children of the parties’ marriage to *450 California under G. L. c. 208, § 30 (1988 ed.). 1 The parties had signed a separation agreement which…”

Rosenthal v. Maney (2001) massappct · cites it 2× “A request for removal is governed by G. L. c. 208, § 30, 10 as that statute has been interpreted by Yannas, 395 Mass.”

Prenaveau v. Prenaveau (2009) massappct · cites it 2× “Although he denied that request, the single justice converted the petition into a full appeal and expedited that appeal for a decision to issue prior to the commencement of the children’s school year. Discussion. 1. Custody and Removal.”

Wakefield v. Hegarty (2006) massappct · cites it 2× “Croix in the United States Virgin Islands under G. L. c. 208, § 30, and granting her sole physical and legal custody of the child.”

Show all 50 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.